Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 7081797" data-attributes="member: 957">how could that possibly be even contemplated as objective fact? It is abundantly clear that to some large number of people the value of that agency is less than the cost of it.&nbsp; Which isn't to claim that the opposite is any less purely preference.&nbsp; It is objective fact that there are groups which strongly prefer each and groups which are much more moderate.In theory it could also be shown as objective fact that one approach creates more players and sales.&nbsp; But there is nothing objective about &quot;more fun&quot; for either.Ultimately though, it isn't honest debate to frame the conversation around one side as virtuous and the other as backwards.To me, quotes from 4E designers regarding things like making monks cool game pieces rather than focused on modeling a monk are completely destroying the attraction of the game.&nbsp; But I can readily see why someone else may feel the opposite.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 7081797, member: 957"] how could that possibly be even contemplated as objective fact? It is abundantly clear that to some large number of people the value of that agency is less than the cost of it. Which isn't to claim that the opposite is any less purely preference. It is objective fact that there are groups which strongly prefer each and groups which are much more moderate. In theory it could also be shown as objective fact that one approach creates more players and sales. But there is nothing objective about "more fun" for either. Ultimately though, it isn't honest debate to frame the conversation around one side as virtuous and the other as backwards. To me, quotes from 4E designers regarding things like making monks cool game pieces rather than focused on modeling a monk are completely destroying the attraction of the game. But I can readily see why someone else may feel the opposite. [/QUOTE]

Verification